The mettle of this country and its people always comes to the surface at the times of crises as evidenced by the recent national cohesive popular stand that followed the aborted subversive attempt.
A number of facts have further affirmed the above the first of which is represented in total rejection of violence as an avenue for resolving political disputes and hence unrelenting denunciation of Khalil's conduct. The second point to bear in this respect is that the people of Sudan may diverge or concur with their governments over the different issues those they vehemently reject falling back on foreign parties to deal with national governments. The third point is that despite the recent crisis the atmosphere now is more favourable for national reconciliation than it has ever been.

Perceived from that angle, the drive launched by the Umma Party leader El-Sadig El-Mahdi during his Friday prayer speech for national reconciliation clearly indicates that the environment is favourable and receptive for an all-embracing national reconciliation since the drive has made support from all parties concerned with the welfare of this country.

The whole world has seen how the national political entities, both in government and opposition, have assembled and acted in concert in their rejection of Khalil's move as all national circles scoffed at Khalil's trend of thought and any other trends that is aimed at undermining the stability of the country and expose its population to hazards that are not associated with national responsibility.
We chew over the above while being mindful of the fact that Darfur case has bee hijacked by the international organization under the sponsorship of certain great power that seem reluctant to put an end to the crisis by pushing for a comprehensive and equitable peace deal to put an end to the suffering of the people of Darfur. It is also apparent that those powers are not yet ready for the arrangements for peace and have therefore headed for security arrangements which clearly cannot be isolated from peace.

Throughout the past years we have remained patiently awaiting the outcome of mediators shuttle trips from one capital to another, from Khartoum to Darfur and back to the quarters of the international organization. These shuttle trips are still awaiting the blessings of great powers that are heedless of the strife of Darfur and its people.

Such a state of affairs naturally dictates reconsideration of international mediation and initiatives to contemplate the prospect of replacing them by national mediations since the Sudanese people are much more keenly aware of their home problems and are more qualified for resolving them away from the conflicting international agenda.

Those complain of failure to implement agreements should hold Naivasha as a model deal to be emulated since the bulk of the items of this agreement have been implemented. Moreover, any complications that face the implementation of the remaining items of that agreement would not constitute a feasible ground for war. Wouldn't it be better to stick to an agreement that preserves people's lives and warrants equitable distribution of wealth and power, even if its implementation is flawed by some complications, than to remain in a constant state of war.
We join hands with all parties that call on rebel factions to lay down arms, join the peace negotiations and dissociate themselves from foreign agendas that not hold the country's concerns at heart as a priority.

We believe that all problems and disputes can be settled by such benevolent inclinations towards a broad national reconciliation, and we also welcome the transcendence of differences between the National Congress Party and the Umma National Party because that reconciliation will eventually embrace all the Sudanese people under a national banner that will render us masters of out own affairs and precludes foreign intervention into Sudan's affairs.